Filed: Jun. 06, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 26, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6291 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. COREY MCKENZIE DAVIS, a/k/a Lil C, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (3:07-cr-00672-JFA-2) Submitted: May 31, 2012 Decided: June 6, 2012 Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Corey McKenzie Davi
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6291 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. COREY MCKENZIE DAVIS, a/k/a Lil C, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (3:07-cr-00672-JFA-2) Submitted: May 31, 2012 Decided: June 6, 2012 Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Corey McKenzie Davis..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6291 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. COREY MCKENZIE DAVIS, a/k/a Lil C, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (3:07-cr-00672-JFA-2) Submitted: May 31, 2012 Decided: June 6, 2012 Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Corey McKenzie Davis, Appellant Pro Se. Tara L. McGregor, Jane Barrett Taylor, Assistant United States Attorneys, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Corey McKenzie Davis appeals the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion to reduce his sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Davis, No. 3:07-cr- 00672-JFA-2 (D.S.C. Jan. 17, 2012). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
